Skip to content

Rework the README security note - #207

Merged
manuc66 merged 4 commits into
masterfrom
feature/split/pr1-readme-security
Aug 16, 2026
Merged

Rework the README security note#207
manuc66 merged 4 commits into
masterfrom
feature/split/pr1-readme-security

Conversation

@manuc66

@manuc66 manuc66 commented Aug 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

Problem

The name-based resolution security risk was buried deep in the STJ section and only covered one package. A reader scanning the README saw no warning before using name-based resolution with untrusted JSON.

Fix

  • Surface the security note at the top of the README, covering both packages.
  • Re-balance: a short pointer up top, the full details back in the STJ section.
  • Open the README with a state-and-choices section (packages, engines, status) instead of a bare note.

Tests

  • Documentation/comment changes only; the full solution build passes on each commit.

Honest note(s)

  • No behavior change; this is documentation and XML-doc wording.

…top of the README

The name-based subtype resolution risk applied to Newtonsoft.Json too, but
only the System.Text.Json section mentioned it, buried at the bottom. Promote
it to a dedicated section right after the intro, state the exact trigger (no
[KnownSubType]/builder mapping declared), and point the STJ section at it.
Explicit [KnownSubType] mapping is the safe path; document the exact trigger
(no mapping declared), the assembly scope and the assignability filter for
Newtonsoft.Json and System.Text.Json so the risk is visible in the IDE, not
only in the README.
…he STJ section

The dedicated top section was too prominent for a documented risk with a real
mitigation. Keep a one-line pointer near the intro and move the full analysis
back next to the other STJ differences, stressing that name-based resolution
only runs when no subtype mapping is declared at all.
Introduce the two packages and the shared API first, tell the reader the
examples are valid for both, and defer the engine choice to the STJ section
where those engines are actually explained.
@codecov

codecov Bot commented Aug 16, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 93.20%. Comparing base (4ef8091) to head (68750fa).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #207   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.20%   93.20%           
=======================================
  Files          19       19           
  Lines        1560     1560           
  Branches      301      301           
=======================================
  Hits         1454     1454           
  Misses         50       50           
  Partials       56       56           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@manuc66
manuc66 merged commit d1f4e11 into master Aug 16, 2026
9 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant